Talk:New Game Plus

This page was proposed for deletion by L0b0t (talk · contribs) on 25 August 2009 with the comment:
Article consists entirely of OR based on a neologism sourced to a video game blog. OR tag and NOTABILITY tag have been in place for a year while REF tag has been unaddressed for 2 years. Plenty of time for any improvement to happen.
It was contested by Taelus (talk · contribs) with the comment:
This is a term/feature used in gaming frequently by actual developers, and is not a neoligism.

Video games Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Gameplay of Pokémon (4 participants)
Lisette Titre-Montgomery (4 participants)
Party royale game (3 participants)
List of Minecraft characters (7 participants)
Carlton Wilborn (5 participants)
Cossacks (video games series) (2 participants; relisted)
Rat Race (video game) (7 participants; relisted)
Red Barrels (3 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Withdrawn by nominator; also per overwhelming consensus so far. (non-admin closure) Salvidrim! 10:54, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New Game Plus → New game plus – Per Wikipedia's guidelines one spelling and capitalizing letters (WP:MOSCAPS), this article should be called New game plus, not New Game Plus. Soetermans. T / C 16:48, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, the concept is nearly always rendered with capitalization, per WP:COMMONNAME. Axem Titanium (talk) 18:11, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:SOURCE? --Soetermans. T / C 18:30, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Take, for example, [1]. It's a proper name of a game mode, as opposed to a descriptive adjective and noun, and thus is all capitalized. --MASEM (t) 18:33, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - By my interpretation of Wikipedia's guidelines on style, it should be lower case letters, because it is an in-game term, like 'save point' or 'dual wielding pistols' or 'high score'. I know that a lot of games usually capitalize everything (much to my dismay), but that doesn't mean we as Wikipedia should do the same thing. Compare to capture the flag, or deathmatch - I can't think of a single game that would list it in-game with lower case letters. Or when you start a game it, doesn't it usually say "New Game"? Just because a plus is added shouldn't mean we have to copy the used style, IMPO. --Soetermans. T / C 18:42, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Or god mode, not God Mode. Difficulties are usually listed with capital letters as well, but you wouldn't write in an article 'players can pick Easy, Medium or Hard' would you? --Soetermans. T / C 18:48, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - (ec) Here, let me Google that for you. Oh, look! [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] 17 million hits nearly all of which use capitalization. Axem Titanium (talk) 18:49, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        As Axem's pointed out, in nearly every game that uses the term, it is "New Game+"/"New Game Plus" as a proper noun. The reason something like god mode or difficulty names are lowercase is because while it is a term of the art, it is not a consistent name used throughout games, and thus it is a descriptor of the general mode. We do use capitalized names for specific unique game modes to a game, eg, Gears of War 3's "Hoard" mode, but it also has the "campaign" mode (a generalized term). --MASEM (t) 18:53, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        But it being, like you said, a descriptor of the general mode, and it not being unique to a single video game (or a particular series even), shouldn't we take it out of the specific context and consider it a general term, and, as such write it so? Or is it Wikipedia's rule that we should keep it the way insiders speak and write of terms? I'm in favor of the former, as you can see. Take for instance job positions. In descriptions or in resumés it always written with capital letters, for example, Manager of Development. On Wikipedia on the other hand would write it as manager of development. I know, I know, it's like WP:OTHERSTUFF, but can't finish this analogy in another video game related term. Anyway, right now I've got two gaming editors - I've seen both your edits on numerous articles, great work! - on the other side of this discussion, is it a fair suggestion to ask another Wikipedian what they of this here situation? --Soetermans. T / C 20:23, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        Sorry for being a little snarky earlier. Yes, please do seek a wider audience. Three people's opinions don't carry much weight at all. I still maintain that the term should remain capitalized, per common use. Axem Titanium (talk) 03:35, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        Don't worry about it, the instant revert on my part was wrong also :) Do you two know anyone who can drop in? --Soetermans. T / C 12:45, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        WT:VG is always a good choice. If you want a non-gamer's perspective, maybe WP:WPMOS? Axem Titanium (talk) 16:09, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Per Axem/Masem and WP:COMMONNAME. It's just about always used with the current capitalization. Sergecross73 msg me 16:11, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - It is not merely a series of three common words, it is an expression that uses particular capitalization. Salvidrim! 19:38, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Per the "Name" argument. - X201 (talk) 22:47, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - While the concept is not a proper noun, sources do use it this way. The reasons are twofold: that names of specific modes in a specific game are proper nouns, and that reviewers are accentuating the phrasiness (not a word) of the neologism. It is not a "new", it is not a "new game"; it is a "new game plus". Often neologism phrases formed of simple words will get the Capital Treatment, or the hyphenated-treatment, to show that each word is part of the phrase. Once everyone gets used to the term, we will hopefully see it used properly. For now we have to go with the sources, even if they slap grammar on the face. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 03:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Convinced! I stand corrected. Thanks for the input everyone. Maybe in the future when video game journalists and writers see it as a common term I'll try another move :D --Soetermans. T / C 09:56, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Add a "Criticisms" section

I think we should add a criticisms section to the wiki article. Although the new game plus does increase replayability, it does that by cheating. This and other techniques like it increase play time without adding lots of new content. Its a cheat by programmers to recycle game assets.

Vmaldia (talk) 01:45, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a reliable source or more about this criticism? We can't include it otherwise. --MASEM (t) 03:00, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If we can find some sources, it'd probably be a good idea to add some sort of "reception" section. -- Gordon Ecker, WikiSloth (talk) 10:28, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization - the category is still in lower case?

The discussion above about moving this article shows the majority of people believe this should be capitalized, as it now is. However the category that includes games with this feature is lower case, this should be altered to match, shouldn't it? Carlwev 18:06, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Increased difficulty

What is the mode called when for instance in Super Mario Brothers, you start the game over after you beat it the first time, and the difficulty is increased? SharkD Talk 10:03, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Necropost, but that's called a "second quest," generally, and it's usually considered distinct from a New Game +. Almost nobody would consider SMB or The Legend of Zelda to have NG+; this article's definition is outside of mainstream usage. Kufat (talk) 13:19, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The first Zelda that's true, but Link's Adventure does have NG+ elements to it, as you carry over most things into a second playthrough, instead of a harder version of the same playthrough like the first game. 50.195.189.109 (talk) 18:16, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What in the World?

Surprised people are worried about New Game+/NG+'s capitalization instead of the fact that Super Mario Bros. and Ghosts and Goblins are used as references to the concept. Playing through the levels twice to beat the game is not NG+, it's playing through the levels twice to beat the game; an artificial game lengthening strategy typical of early games. 50.195.189.109 (talk) 18:13, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]